WitP II ASW Model Discussion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

TheElf -> WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 5:21:56 AM)

Just what it says. Matrix has always been responsive to their customers. What Say we start brainstorming in case this becomes a reality?

Let's keep it to constructive comments/criticism. I am starting this thread but hope the Mods will patrol it and keep things positive.

Ideas for the new model and limitations of/gripes about the old one are welcome. limit your post to posting ideas/gripes not engaging each other in pointless arguements. Feel free to agree and expand on each others concepts!



GaryChildress -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 5:37:10 AM)

I'd like to see sonar added to the devices list, improving a ships ability to attack subs. With that said I also think ASW needs to be toned down both in terms of the leathalness of DCs and the spotting of submarines by patrolling aircraft.

Gary



witpqs -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 5:53:48 AM)

In 1.795 the DC damage has been toned down, but search aircraft still are too effective. That needs to be reduced.

I would also like to see all ship and nationality characteristics in the database instead of hard coded. For ASW that means doing away with things like the Allied ASW bonus - just build it into the database. That way ships that are equipped but not trained in doctrine could be modded, for example.



1EyedJacks -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 11:28:19 AM)

I would like the ability to define a few hexes that my subs patrol back and forth until they start running low on deisel...

Also - using mines is a pain in the arse. It would be nice to clean this up a little



Black Mamba 1942 -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 5:56:41 PM)

Yes, a continual patrol option would be great for certain missions.

It would simplify, and cut down on the micromanagement.
A larger game WILL need less micromanagement to make it playable.[;)]



kokubokan25 -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 9:40:02 PM)

I would like the micromanage of subs more better. Some subs continue on patrol with heavy damage on sys. This may be controled by human at first stages of the game but is impossible in 44 and forward with 500 subs on patrol.



mogami -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 9:44:17 PM)

Hi, In the current model you can place sub under human control and drive to the hex you desire. Then you can set it to computer control and it will follow contacts on it's own and when damaged or out of ammo head home on it's own.
You can retake control whenever you wish and move it to a new location and then put it back under computer control.
The only problem is when a sub under computer control gets home it will reload ammo and then head back to it's last location. (This is fine as long as it is not damaged)



pad152 -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 10:00:09 PM)

quote:

In 1.795 the DC damage has been toned down, but search aircraft still are too effective.


I think the DC damage may have been toned down, little too much, in 60 days of a campaign I have not sunk or lost a sub.

The ASW model, you really can't tell because, of the super-uber sub spotting. We need a version with the sub search fixed. [:-]



1EyedJacks -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 10:10:10 PM)

Hi Mogami,

The sub will follow contacts on its own? Very cool! Is this a function of the leader - Agressiveness or something? The things you learn in the forum... Now I gotta go back 2 the manual and see if this is in there - I sure don't 'member reading this! [:D]


After checking the manual...
The following contacts on its own thing - is this an undocumented feature?[&:]

From da manual:


Pg 63
Submarines, usually sent on patrol as a TF, usually with only one sub in each. The computer can give it patrol orders, or you can choose to give it a Destination Hex (DH) yourself. Missions for sub TF’s are Sub Patrol, Sub Minelaying, and Sub Transport (refer to sections 6.1.9.8, 6.1.9.9, and 6.1.9.10 respectively for more details). Subs can attack enemy shipping as they move through the sub’s hex, in the same manner as mines.

Note 6.1.9.8 – is replenishment, 6.1.9.9 is Mine warfare, and 6.1.9.10 is sub patrol

Pg 64
Max React Range is only available to Air Combat and Surface Combat Task Forces. The player sets a Max React Range for their appropriate TFs, which is the maximum number of hexes the TF will move when reacting to an enemy’s presence (0 to 6). If the player does not want the TF to react, he simply sets the Max React Range to 0.

Pg 84
6.1.9.10 Sub Patrol
The Sub Patrol TF has a maximum of 25 ships (although they always work best when operating alone). A TF with a Sub Patrol Mission will attempt to attack enemy ships with torpedoes.

ALL SUB PATROL TF’S
Cruise to DH
Remain at DH
Initiate Submarine Combat




mogami -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 10:42:41 PM)

Hi, Subs on computer control wil remain in DH....untill they make contact then they will follow the contact. same as UV. Human controlled subs will not follow contacts.



1EyedJacks -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 11:20:36 PM)

Give up control??? To a program?? Oh shades of Tron - not the program...[:-] ---[:D]

In truth I've never tried it like that. But I'll give it a whirl - it sounds cool[:D]




witpqs -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/19/2006 11:36:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, In the current model you can place sub under human control and drive to the hex you desire. Then you can set it to computer control and it will follow contacts on it's own and when damaged or out of ammo head home on it's own.
You can retake control whenever you wish and move it to a new location and then put it back under computer control.
The only problem is when a sub under computer control gets home it will reload ammo and then head back to it's last location. (This is fine as long as it is not damaged)


That's a problem. Plus, you have to hunt around to find the ones under computer control. A list would be nice.



Mike Scholl -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/20/2006 3:30:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, In the current model you can place sub under human control and drive to the hex you desire. Then you can set it to computer control and it will follow contacts on it's own and when damaged or out of ammo head home on it's own.
You can retake control whenever you wish and move it to a new location and then put it back under computer control.
The only problem is when a sub under computer control gets home it will reload ammo and then head back to it's last location. (This is fine as long as it is not damaged)


That's a problem. Plus, you have to hunt around to find the ones under computer control. A list would be nice.


What would be even nicer is some color coding. Have the ship turn half red or yellow or something if it has damage or is running low on fuel. Let me see without clicking that I need to pay some attention to this sub. Huge time saver.



witpqs -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (3/20/2006 3:48:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

What would be even nicer is some color coding. Have the ship turn half red or yellow or something if it has damage or is running low on fuel. Let me see without clicking that I need to pay some attention to this sub. Huge time saver.



Yep. Or when low on ammo ...



TheElf -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/12/2006 5:04:27 AM)

Bump



ny59giants -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/12/2006 5:55:18 AM)

How would US "Wolf Pack" tactics be added in later war years?? The US did very well with this after the torpedeo problem was solved.



zuikaku -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/12/2006 1:05:38 PM)

I think that ASW is already toned down too bit. In my game, I have 3 hunter killer groups with 20 DDs or PCs in each. They are supported with 60 floatplanes from AVs and CSs, and nearly 150 land based aircrafts on ASW. I manage to follow USS Baracooda in a manner that my ASW TFs ends up in the same hex as her after each phase. And neither of the group usually makes contact with her, and if so, they don't attack with DCs (yes, they are unable to find sub). The water is shallow, and experience of my destroyers and even PCs is ranging from 60-70 day or night. Finding subs shouldn't be easy (2 or 3 PCs or DDs should have trouble, and must not be able to sink a sub to easy). But with such an ASW efforts sub should be attacked at least few times a day. And when located by aircrafts, dedicated ASW groups should not have to much trouble in finding her. Even the Japanese ones. I think that Japanese never employed 200 aircrafts on ASW in small area. and the game is toned down in such a way that employing 200 aircrafts on ASW does the same effect as 20 aircrafts had in real life. I think that ASW combat was the most realistic in v1.50 ...



Damien Thorn -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/12/2006 7:49:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: zuikaku

I think that ASW is already toned down too bit. In my game, I have 3 hunter killer groups with 20 DDs or PCs in each. They are supported with 60 floatplanes from AVs and CSs, and nearly 150 land based aircrafts on ASW. I manage to follow USS Baracooda in a manner that my ASW TFs ends up in the same hex as her after each phase. And neither of the group usually makes contact with her, and if so, they don't attack with DCs (yes, they are unable to find sub). The water is shallow, and experience of my destroyers and even PCs is ranging from 60-70 day or night. Finding subs shouldn't be easy (2 or 3 PCs or DDs should have trouble, and must not be able to sink a sub to easy). But with such an ASW efforts sub should be attacked at least few times a day. And when located by aircrafts, dedicated ASW groups should not have to much trouble in finding her. Even the Japanese ones. I think that Japanese never employed 200 aircrafts on ASW in small area. and the game is toned down in such a way that employing 200 aircrafts on ASW does the same effect as 20 aircrafts had in real life. I think that ASW combat was the most realistic in v1.50 ...


You are doing everything right in your ASW routines except for one thing... you're playing the Japanese side. It's those secret hidden modifiers that are nation specific that are killing you. If you reveresed the situation you wouldn't even have a chance to ammass such a large ASW force. The sub would be dead before half of hte assets even got on scene. (By the way, my comments don't include any changes in the 1.7xx betas so if they have dropped thenation-specifc modifiers you cna ignore this.)

Damien Thorn




zuikaku -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/13/2006 10:24:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn


You are doing everything right in your ASW routines except for one thing... you're playing the Japanese side. It's those secret hidden modifiers that are nation specific that are killing you. If you reveresed the situation you wouldn't even have a chance to ammass such a large ASW force. The sub would be dead before half of hte assets even got on scene. (By the way, my comments don't include any changes in the 1.7xx betas so if they have dropped thenation-specifc modifiers you cna ignore this.)

Damien Thorn




If Japanese ASW routines were so seriously retarded in real war, they would never sink a single sub!
I'm playing v1.6 but will switch back to 1.5, because in this version... well, it's just too much[:@]. I'm aware of Japanese limitations in ASW, but this is.... errr... too much [sm=00000023.gif][sm=00000055.gif]



bradfordkay -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/13/2006 6:58:08 PM)

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the ASW routine limit actual attacks to the first six ships? Thus if you have 20 DDs in an ASW TF, it will stop attacking after six DDs have dropped depth charges.



Nikademus -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/13/2006 8:15:30 PM)

new routine limits total attackers to 4 ships within any one TF.



mogami -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/15/2006 1:35:12 AM)

Hi BETA!!! version 1.8
USN Submarine Sea Owl has made attacks in same hex for 3 days off Home Islands been DC's a few times (5 hits or near miss) damage sustained sys 3

This looks like a large number of spottings but there are near 100 USN submarines deployed off Home islands and around PI etc.


E13A1 Jake reports shadow in water at 64, 44
E7K2 Alf reports suspected submarine at 61, 44
E13A1 Jake reports diving submarine at 61, 44
E7K2 Alf reports shadow in water at 61, 44
E7K2 Alf reports shadow in water at 64, 44
G4M1 Betty reports diving submarine at 64, 44
G4M1 Betty reports diving submarine at 64, 44
E13A1 Jake reports shadow in water at 46, 47
P1Y Frances reports suspected submarine at 61, 44
P1Y Frances reports periscope at 64, 44
D4Y Judy reports radio transmissions at 61, 44
D4Y Judy reports shadow in water at 64, 44
H8K Emily reports shadow in water at 63, 55
E13A1 Jake reports shadow in water at 64, 44
E13A1 Jake reports radio transmissions at 64, 44
E13A1 Jake reports shadow in water at 61, 44
E13A1 Jake reports radio transmissions at 64, 44
E14Y1 Glen reports periscope at 64, 44



IronDuke_slith -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/15/2006 2:04:33 AM)


I often think subs are essentially used in a way that will maximise casualties. I've seen opponents mass them around invasion hexes in shallow waters and even Jap ASW TFs can hit them hard there.

I think the one thing I'd highlight is that subs spotted by aircraft seem to have any ASW TFs in the hex automatically latch onto them, even though it may be several hours between that sighting and the arrival of the ASW TF. I get the impression subs don't take evasive action or dive deep and move away the minute they see masts on the horizon in these circumstances. I think attacks can be a little too effective when they get made. I suspect more depth charges per hit would have been dropped than is the case in the game but what I find is that whilst it is possible to reduce sub losses quite significantly, the tactics required to do that need you to stop sinking anything as well.

Regards,
IronDuke



Black Mamba 1942 -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/15/2006 3:59:28 AM)

Only 4 ships will counterattack in 1.8.
Bummer.[:(]

No more 20 ship gangbang.[:D]



Ron Saueracker -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/15/2006 5:18:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: zuikaku


quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn


You are doing everything right in your ASW routines except for one thing... you're playing the Japanese side. It's those secret hidden modifiers that are nation specific that are killing you. If you reveresed the situation you wouldn't even have a chance to ammass such a large ASW force. The sub would be dead before half of hte assets even got on scene. (By the way, my comments don't include any changes in the 1.7xx betas so if they have dropped thenation-specifc modifiers you cna ignore this.)

Damien Thorn




If Japanese ASW routines were so seriously retarded in real war, they would never sink a single sub!
I'm playing v1.6 but will switch back to 1.5, because in this version... well, it's just too much[:@]. I'm aware of Japanese limitations in ASW, but this is.... errr... too much [sm=00000023.gif][sm=00000055.gif]


The model is OK, all that needs to be done is increase the number of DCs dropped by the rails, right now they are only dropping 1 DC per rail per attack when roughly 3-6 were dropped per rack to form part of a pattern. The K and Y guns are OK but the racks fired more than 1 charge. Simple matter of editor manipulation (instead of having two rails, have 2 banks of 4 perhaps. (of course the ammo will have to be adjusted as well,)



Ron Saueracker -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (4/15/2006 5:18:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

Only 4 ships will counterattack in 1.8.
Bummer.[:(]

No more 20 ship gangbang.[:D]


Thank Gawd.[8D]



TheElf -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (5/1/2006 10:33:06 PM)

bump



siRkid -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (5/1/2006 10:57:52 PM)

I lost two subs as the allies last turn. So, its hard for me to think it was toned down too much. Time will tell. I have to agree that subs are still being spotted from the aeir way too often.



wild_Willie2 -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (5/2/2006 12:44:00 AM)

quote:

I lost two subs as the allies last turn. So, its hard for me to think it was toned down too much. Time will tell. I have to agree that subs are still being spotted from the aeir way too often.


In the last 30 Pbem turns I have lost over 10 japanese subs to allied ASW forces, we are palying NIK mod and ASW TF's are limited to 6 ships. My subs get 20-30 hits per attack, while japanese DD's strugle to even get 2-3 hits on a US sub (IF they even drop DC when they attack)...

In my oppinion allied ASW is STILL to powerfull......



treespider -> RE: WitP II ASW Model Discussion (5/2/2006 12:45:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wild_Willie2

quote:

I lost two subs as the allies last turn. So, its hard for me to think it was toned down too much. Time will tell. I have to agree that subs are still being spotted from the aeir way too often.


In the last 30 Pbem turns I have lost over 10 japanese subs to allied ASW forces, we are palying NIK mod and ASW TF's are limited to 6 ships. My subs get 20-30 hits per attack, while japanese DD's strugle to even get 2-3 hits on a US sub (IF they even drop DC when they attack)...

In my oppinion allied ASW is STILL to powerfull......



How do you handle your subs? Computer Control or manual? Do you move them daily or leave them in place? Shallow water or deep water?



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.109375